OU - very difficult Lamar - very easy @Tx State - very easy Louisville - difficult UCF - easy UConn - easy Tulane - easy Tulsa - easy @Cinci - difficult @Memphis - easy @Navy - difficult @SMU - easy 4 losses is the going rate I'd say. UCF might have a bounceback year and Tulsa is usually a tough out for some reason, but Memphis is poised to fall off a cliff.
Ken Starr (BU) and David Boren (OU) have also met with Khator in the last few weeks. There is certainly some smoke and Hargis (OKSU)is set to meet with Khator soon as well.
Depends on how the AAC schedule is and when we play them. As of now OU is our toughest schedule opponent that is on the schedule. Louisville might be hard, but we will be at home now with more tape to study Lamar Jackson. Navy wont be difficult because Reynolds will be gone. If we face them early in the schedule I like our shot on the road. Cincy might not have Kiel at QB.
Think I would have given that to Navy's coach considering the talent level he has to work with. Happy for Herm though
I dont see what the Big XII really has to gain by adding UH. It doesnt bring in a new tv market and they are historically not good team in either football or basketball. Obviously they would be added with someone else allowing the conference to have a CCG but thats the only real plus. On Herman, I think he waited to see if Trojans or Georgia had strong interest in him which I dont think either seriously did. He got his well deserved raise and has some studs coming in for next year. He knows that Texas and maybe ATM have a chance to be available to him if he waits and has another good year. I think he really covets the Texas job because he'd be able to stay in Texas, work at a premier program, be paid gobs of money, and basically hire whoever he wants to work for him. I obviously hope Strong is the guy for UT but its doubtful to say the least. The same goes for Sumlin if has yet another mediocre year.
I believe they do but doubt they really care who it is really. I'm sure you guys are tired of hearing this but adding UH to the Big XII doesn't make financial sense and I'm sure most of us will agree that money is the bottom line. Sharing t.v. revenue with a new member that doesn't add a new market is something no team in any conference would want. And on the field success does not count for much either. The Big XII actually had the most success in the new realignment from a pure football standpoint adding a team who had 4 straight Top 25 finishes and 2 BCS Bowl appearances. TCU has also had way more success than any team that was part of the realignment, yet the conference is still seen as some wounded animal waiting to be taken out back. If the Big XII wants to stay alive, they need to expand their market base similar to what the SEC and Pac-10 did, adding a 5th Texas team won't do it.
We're as tired of hearing that as you are tired of hearing that the Big 12 TV contract payout would not be affected for existing members by expanding and that the Big 12 is struggling to pull SEC type numbers in the Houston market outside of UT. Additional matters of fact are that the Big 12 would be improved by adding two competitive athletic programs and establishing a championship game (more often than not having your conference champ play another competitive team will bolster their resume) as well as creating its own TV network. I'm not a TV or Bowl executive, so I can't tell you exactly who is best for completing those two objectives, but I can tell you that UH is on a very short list of programs that are being reviewed for such purposes.
Not affected under the current contract but hopefully Bowlsby is looking at the long term viability of the conference. Yes the Big 12 lost a big part of Houston when A&M left but the question is whether UH can fill that void. Historically speaking, the answer is a for sure no. Executives would have to project and maybe they like what they saw from this season, but don't think they have enough positive data points. A lot also hinges on Herman and whether he stays for more than 1 season. That is a big risk to take and I'm sure a pretty large consideration. Will it help with Houston regardless of Herman? Absolutely. But would the Big 12 be better off trying to recapture what they lost in Houston or try to expand to a Tampa, Cincinnati, or Philadelphia? I agree with this 100%.
Screw the big12, I rather join the Pac12. Don't have to worry about the league faltering or one team calling all the shots.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Tom Herman now officially staying at Houston. Source says he signed new contract this am. Was expected to more than double salary, to $3 mil</p>— Travis Haney (@TravHaneyESPN) <a href="https://twitter.com/TravHaneyESPN/status/672782772407283712">December 4, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Houston HC Tom Herman signed new 5-year deal this morning for approx. $2.8 million annually & includes $200,000 more for staff per source.</p>— Thayer Evans (@ThayerEvansSI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThayerEvansSI/status/672782926912741378">December 4, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">SOURCE: Tom Herman inks new deal w/ <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/UH?src=hash">#UH</a> at $3 MIL. Buyout is $2.25 next YR. New deal inc. guarantees for significant program improvements.</p>— Bruce Feldman (@BruceFeldmanCFB) <a href="https://twitter.com/BruceFeldmanCFB/status/672787932713893888">December 4, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
So one reporter saying $2.8m/yr and another saying $3m/yr? Wonder why the discrepancy. I expected it to take more money, both for his contract and for the assistants. I was also expecting a higher buyout.
